(Los Angeles, June 28, 2010) — Lambda
Legal welcomed today's U.S. Supreme Court ruling that upholds a policy at
a California law school that groups receiving campus funding must accept
"all comers;" that is, not discriminate on the basis of race,
religion, sexual orientation or other status or belief. The Christian
Legal Society (CLS) at the University of California Hastings had filed
suit after the university revoked recognition because the group barred
membership to "unrepentant homosexuals." While upholding the
law school's policy, the Court remanded to the 9th Circuit an assertion
by CLS that Hastings applied its non-discrimination policy selectively in
this case.
Lambda Legal and Gay and Lesbian Advocates
and Defenders (GLAD) filed a friend of the court brief in this case
arguing that CLS's exclusion of students who engage in same-sex sexual
activity without remorse excludes gay people by definition. CLS therefore
violates Hastings Law School's requirement that officially-recognized
student organizations not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation
among other grounds. The brief also argues CLS was properly denied school
recognition because it admitted that Hastings denies recognized student
organization status to any group that is not open to all students.
"We're extremely pleased the Court has
found that discrimination is discrimination, however you try to package
it," said Jon Davidson, Legal Director of Lambda Legal. "CLS
was attempting to draw a distinction between status and conduct. But when
an organization has a membership requirement that one must believe
conduct central to one's identity is immoral, that's the same thing as
excluding people for who they are. It's wrong of CLS to expect students
to fund a group that wouldn't have them as a member. The Court wisely
rejected CLS's attempt to obtain what the Court recognized as
'preferential, not equal treatment' under the school's rules applicable
to all other recognized clubs."
Registration as a student organization at
Hastings gives groups the right to use Hastings' name and logo, access to
a university email address, limited use of facilities, and modest
university funds for travel and other expenses. CLS sued in U.S. District
Court in San Francisco, arguing that, by not allowing it to become a
supported student group, Hastings had violated CLS's rights of free
speech, association and religious freedom under the U.S. Constitution.
The group maintained it did not bar membership to gays, but rather to
those who engaged in homosexual conduct. The District Court rejected
these claims and found in Hastings' favor, as did the U.S. 9th Circuit
Court of Appeals last year.
The Court's majority opinion written by Justice
Ruth Bader Ginsberg, cited both from the brief submitted by Lambda Legal
and GLAD and from its own decision in Lambda Legal's 2003 victory in Lawrence v. Texas,
saying justices have traditionally declined to distinguish between status
and conduct:
"To bring the RSO program within CLS's
view of the Constitution's limits, CLS proposes that Hastings permit
exclusion because of belief
but forbid discrimination due to status.
But that proposal would impose on Hastings a daunting labor. How should
the Law School go about determining whether a student organization
cloaked prohibited status exclusion in belief-based garb? If a
hypothetical Male-Superiority Club barred a female student from running
for its presidency, for example, how could the Law School tell whether
the group rejected her bid because of her sex or because, by seeking to
lead the club, she manifested a lack of belief in its fundamental
philosophy?"
Justice Steven's last day on the bench
included a concurring opinion in this case: "Other groups may
exclude or mistreat Jews, blacks, and women—or those who do not
share their contempt for Jews, blacks, and women. A free society must
tolerate such groups. It need not subsidize them."
"Lambda Legal would like to send
condolences to Justice Ginsberg and her family on the loss of her
husband, Martin Ginsberg. And we would also like to again salute Justice
Stevens on his last day on the bench," added Davidson.
Hastings' gay student group was represented
by The National Center for Lesbian Rights and Lambda Legal Board co-chair
Paul Smith of Jenner & Block.
The amicus brief in Christian Legal Society
Chapter of University of California, Hastings College of Law v. Martinez
(Case No. 08-1371) was prepared by Jon W. Davidson and Susan L. Sommer of
Lambda Legal, Gary Buseck and Mary L. Bonauto of GLAD, and Clifford M.
Sloan, Bradley A. Klein, Daniele M. Schiffman, and Ray D. McKenzie of the
firm of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom.
###
Contact: Jason Pérez Howe, 213-382-7600
ext.247; jhowe@lambdalegal.org
Lambda Legal is a national organization
committed to achieving full recognition of the civil rights of lesbians,
gay men, bisexuals, transgender people and those with HIV through impact
litigation, education and public policy work.
